• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: The News Thread

it is the absolute pinnacle of arrogance and pretension to believe that anyone who believes in religion is stupid, and not to be taken seriously. its the pinnacle of arrogance and narcissism. you in your wisdom honestly believe that you can dismiss thousands of years of human thought and development and spirituality. you might not AGREE with it, but to dismiss it is supremely arrogant. a "fairy tale" wouldnt have lasted over 2000 years nor had such a dominant hold on human progress.

but for effete latte-sipping "intellectuals" who think they know better, its part of their self-image to believe they know better and to sniff at "fools" who believe in religion and spirituality.
 
Fire and brimstone isn't a fabricated tale? Do tell.

I love spiritualism...it is a positive part of my life but it doesn't make me believe in fairytales.
 
Father-Christmas-smoking-012.jpg
 
Oh and I have no problem with Catholics...for the most part they are simply seeking comfort. I have a problem when they start putting people into categories in order to scare up more donations...and these categories are nothing more than human fabrications.

A press release that simply stated....

"Come join the church, we will help you make sense of your life and ease suffering worldwide through the power of positivity."

That would make me think.

Nope they gotta throw out the eternal damnation stuff....in the year 2013.
 
in more important news... a staffer in the mayor's office has been questioned by police in relation to the murder of that kid in the picture with ford. the article suggests that the phone containing the video was his cell phone.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...illing-to-alleged-drug-video/article12163629/

The informant in the mayor’s office purported to know the address and unit number where the video was being held.

They went on to say that the video originally belonged to an individual who may have been killed for its potentially valuable contents, according to a source.
Click to expand...
 
Meh. This is all starting to get alittle too out there.

IF this story fizzles out the Toronto Star should issue a front page apology and Gawker should take some serious reputational damage.
 
theREALkoreaboy said:
it is the absolute pinnacle of arrogance and pretension to believe that anyone who believes in religion is stupid, and not to be taken seriously. its the pinnacle of arrogance and narcissism. you in your wisdom honestly believe that you can dismiss thousands of years of human thought and development and spirituality. you might not AGREE with it, but to dismiss it is supremely arrogant. a "fairy tale" wouldnt have lasted over 2000 years nor had such a dominant hold on human progress.

but for effete latte-sipping "intellectuals" who think they know better, its part of their self-image to believe they know better and to sniff at "fools" who believe in religion and spirituality.
Click to expand...

I always love the Irony of the modern day badass-conservative attitude that they can be so arrogant and narcissistic while calling everyone else arrogant and narcissistic.

Anyone who believes that there is any scripture in human history that is an accurate historical document is a moron, period.
 
corksens said:
Meh. This is all starting to get alittle too out there.

IF this story fizzles out the Toronto Star should issue a front page apology and Gawker should take some serious reputational damage.
Click to expand...

why?

it's pretty clear at this point that there is, or was, a video on a cell phone of rob ford smoking crack. otherwise you're just calling people liars, when they have no demonstrable motivation for lying.

i mean, why the hell is gawker's editor going to pay money to travel to toronto, put himself in a dangerous situation by driving to adiscrete location with people he knows to be dangerous, and then write a story corroborating the events and proclaiming that it is rob ford in the video... if it actually isn't (or if no video exists)?

that's pretty ludicrous.

not to mention the fact that two toronto star reporters have staked their credibility to the contents of the video. not to mention the other fact that three (one entirely unrelated from the other two) people have seen teh video and all agreed it was ford.
 
And I love that the world has Catholicism to thank for the life we enjoy today. As if we couldn't be living in an equal or better world under any other doctrine.
 
mbow30 said:
why?

it's pretty clear at this point that there is, or was, a video on a cell phone of rob ford smoking crack. otherwise you're just calling people liars, when they have no demonstrable motivation for lying.

i mean, why the hell is gawker's editor going to pay money to travel to toronto, put himself in a dangerous situation by driving to adiscrete location with people he knows to be dangerous, and then write a story corroborating the events and proclaiming that it is rob ford in the video... if it actually isn't (or if no video exists)?

that's pretty ludicrous.

not to mention the fact that two toronto star reporters have staked their credibility to the contents of the video. not to mention the other fact that three (one entirely unrelated from the other two) people have seen teh video and all agreed it was ford.
Click to expand...
Do I need to list the reasons why the Toronto Star would go ahead with this story?

The Gawker angle I don't have any answers for - but this is exactly why stories shouldn't break without the necessary information and proof being at hand.
 
90% of reporting is on the basis of information provided by, stated by or confirmed by anonymous informants.

this isn't a peculiar situation at all.

so what you are in effect saying is that reporters shouldn't report things unless they have 100% verifiable proof. but the truth is that almost never exists in the hands of reporters.
 
corksens said:
Do I need to list the reasons why the Toronto Star would go ahead with this story?

The Gawker angle I don't have any answers for - but this is exactly why stories shouldn't break without the necessary information and proof being at hand.
Click to expand...

Ahh c'mon, you're missing out on all the fun of not belonging to the lynch mob. You don't need proof of a serious allegation, all you have to do is pretend you have some "sources" and go for it. Pravda is now using their own gossip columnist...err "reporters" as sources. Like pedophiles quoting pedophiles.
 
HabsAddict said:
Ahh c'mon, you're missing out on all the fun of not belonging to the lynch mob. You don't need proof of a serious allegation, all you have to do is pretend you have some "sources" and go for it. Pravda is now using their own gossip columnist...err "reporters" as sources. Like pedophiles quoting pedophiles.
Click to expand...

07-minister.jpg
 
and, of course, there is a boatload of irony in the pravda reference, given that you're refuting claims made by the free press in support of the belated, obtuse account provided by a politician who is a known liar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top